Unyime Davies is a highly regarded criminal law specialist with a reputation as a formidable and persuasive advocate across the whole spectrum of criminal offences. Unyime’s work also encompasses advice and advocacy across regulatory law, professional discipline and fraud.
She has a reputation for excellent advocacy backed by meticulous case preparation and superb client care. Her effective communication skills and sensitivity has meant she is in high demand in cases involving vulnerable individuals and very young children, as both defendants and witnesses.
Built on her sound expertise in all serious sexual offences (both prosecuting and defending), she is frequently instructed in cases alleging serious violence up to and including attempted murder, serious organised crime and high value fraud. She also handles multi-handed drugs conspiracy and large-scale fraud cases.
Unyime is an experienced Grade 3 prosecutor for the Crown Prosecution Service as well as being a member of the CPS panel of rape specialists. She has successfully appeared in the court of appeal for both the Crown and the applicant and is a regular contributor to Thomson Reuters Practical Law publication.
Unyime prosecutes and defends (as a led junior) in cases of murder and manslaughter. She has acted as a junior alone in cases of attempted murder and arson with intent to endanger life.
R v W
Defence counsel (Junior Alone) acting for a homeless man accused of the attempted murder of two 12 year old children. Defendant had signiﬁcant mental health issues.
R v J
Defence counsel (Junior Alone) representing a defendant who was charged with the attempted murder of his 92 year old mother.
R v F
Prosecution counsel in a case of arson with intent to endanger life. The defendant set fire to her flat at night (within an apartment block) with intent to kill her partner.
Unyime is highly experienced in defending and prosecuting cases involving the most serious sexual offences, including those involving very young children and multiple complaints and/or defendants.
Unyime is instructed in cases of significant complexity requiring careful handling of both defendants and witnesses. Unyime is experienced in making legal arguments that can make a critical difference to a case. She is particularly sought-after in cases where complex disclosure issues are likely to arise.
R v S
Prosecution counsel in a stranger rape case. The complainant was a 17 year old girl with mental health difficulties. The case involved extensive legal argument regarding s.41, Bad Character and admissibility of psychological evidence.
R v M
Prosecuting counsel in a case involving a teacher that had sex with his underage pupil. All the live witnesses were children.
R v D
Prosecution counsel in a case involving multiple counts of rape by a man on his 14 year old daughter. The case involved careful consideration and drafting of advice on sensitive unused material.
R v W
Defence counsel for a driving instructor accused of sexually assaulting 5 of his students during driving lessons.
R v DLC
Defence counsel in a sex case involving a 25-count indictment and a 14 year old complainant.
R v P
Prosecution counsel. The defendant was a serving police ofﬁcer found to be in possession of indecent images of children and extreme pornography. Case involved complicated expert evidence and 4 computer/ dark web experts giving evidence.
R v C
Defence counsel for an 18 year old man accused of falsely imprisoning, strangling and raping his 17 year old ex-girlfriend.
R v M & Others
Defence counsel in a multi-handed stranger rape case. The defendant had been accused of a gang and stranger rape of a young woman. The case also involved complicated expert DNA evidence and a ‘cut-throat defence’.
R v J
Defence counsel in a case where the defendant with mental health issues was alleged to have had sexual intercourse with his underage sister (suffering from learning difficulties).
R v H
Defence counsel in youth court case. The defendant, a 12-year-old with learning difficulties alleged to have raped and assaulted by penetration a 6 year old boy.
R V S
Prosecution counsel in the youth court. The defendant aged 13, was alleged to have raped two brothers aged 5 and 6 years old.
Unyime has vast experience both prosecuting and defending in multi-complainant historic sexual offences dating as far back as 40 years.
She is frequently instructed to draft pre-charge advice on historic multi-complaint cases.
Unyime is used to the management of extensive third-party material and challenging expert evidence.
R v J
Defence counsel representing a 75 year old man facing 45 year old allegations of sexual offences made by two family members.
R v B
Defence counsel for a man accused of raping both of his step daughters, 30 years ago, when they were aged between 6 and 15.
R v M
Defence counsel for a former Royal Marine accused of child cruelty and seriously sexually assaulting his two stepdaughters 35 years ago, when the stepdaughters were 7 and 12 years of age.
R v P
Prosecution counsel in a case involving the defendant, a vicar, accused of subjecting his daughter to physical and sexual abuse when she was aged 8-13. The allegations dated back over 30 years ago.
R v H
Prosecution counsel in a case where the defendant was alleged, 8 years ago, to have assaulted by penetration his niece on multiple occasions, when she was 10 years old.
Unyime prosecutes and defends both cyber-dependant and cyber-enabled crime, including offences using the dark web, cyber-enabled fraud, revenge porn, online grooming and cyber stalking.
Her ability to assimilate vast amounts of material quickly is invaluable in such cases. She is experienced at handling expert witnesses and presenting complicated evidence in a straightforward and digestible way for a jury.
R v E
Defence counsel for a defendant alleged to have used social media to create 3 false personas to stalk his ex-partner and her husband online. The defendant was also alleged to have used a tracker and app to monitor his ex-partner’s car.
R v R
Prosecution counsel in a case where defendant alleged to have communicated sexual and groomed with 9 underage individuals on Kik, WhatsApp, Chatib, Meetme and Skype.
R v M
Prosecuted a case in which the defendant, a 17 year old female, connected with a male on snapchat and sent him indecent images of herself in exchange for money. The defendant later told the male that she was 17 at the time she sent the images and demanded money from him in order not to pursue the matter with police.
R v J
Represented a defendant who had purchased what he believed to be controlled drugs on the dark web for supply. Expert evidence proved drugs were largely inert.
Unyime is experienced in both prosecuting and defending the most serious offences involving gangs or organised crime ranging from serious violence and large-scale drugs conspiracy to sham marriage conspiracies.
Unyime is frequently instructed in long running paper heavy cases.
R v G
Defence counsel representing the first defendant in a 9 handed class A drugs and money laundering conspiracy. The defendant was alleged to have 18 burner phones during the course of the conspiracy, all of which were disputed. The case required extensive analysis of cell site and ANPR evidence.
R v J
Defence counsel in a 4 handed conspiracy to kidnap and falsely imprison two vulnerable complainants following a ‘drug debt’ being incurred. The case involved a cut-throat defence.
R v D
Defence counsel for an 18 year old with significant mental health issues (requiring an intermediary) accused with 4 other defendants of blackmail and false imprisonment.
R v S
Defence counsel for a 15 year old appearing in the Crown Court accused of group s.18 offence with 5 other defendants.
R v MB
Defending (Junior Alone) in a multi handed, large scale sham marriage conspiracy. Unyime successfully representing the legal representative alleged to have been involved in the conspiracy.
R v S & Ors
Led junior counsel for the prosecution in a 12 handed large scale Conspiracy to Supply Class A Drugs. This was the first criminal trial to involve the analysis and presentation of Caller Line Identity [CLI] ‘Spoofing’ designed to mask the origin of mobile phone traffic and to eliminate all records.
R v M & Ors
Prosecution led junior in a 14 handed conspiracy to supply class A drugs case. All 14 defendants were dealt with during one trial.
R v R & Another
Defence counsel for a man accused of aggravated burglary involving a taser. After a successful 7 day voire dire (legal argument) hearing, the identiﬁcation evidence was excluded and the prosecution offered no evidence against the defendant.
R v J & Others
Prosecution counsel in a 6 defendant multi-handed conspiracy to rob. The defendants targeted multiple newsagents late at night to steal tobacco, alcohol and money from the tills.
R v A & Others
Defence counsel in a case involving 4 handed kidnapping, conspiracy to rob, armed robbery and aggravated burglary. The defendants were alleged to have committed the offences against a suspected drug dealer.
R v MW & Others
Defending one of a group of 5 youths charged with attempted S.18 GBH on a police ofﬁcer.
R v S
Prosecuting counsel in trial of S.18/S.20 grievous bodily harm with intent. Involved complex legal argument as the complainant could not be found. The defendant was convicted of S.18 despite the victim not being present to give evidence.
Unyime has broad experience prosecuting and defending in cases involving allegations of death by dangerous/careless driving and causing serious injury by dangerous/careless driving including those involving multiple fatalities and casualties.
She is highly experienced on advising on instructing and questioning expert witnesses.
R v L
Defence counsel in a case involving the defendant driving dangerously during a police chase. The defendant collided with a member of the public pushing him into a wall and causing serious injury. The defence was duress.
R v A
Prosecuting counsel in a case causing death by dangerous driving. The defendant allegedly drove dangerously and whilst unfit due to drugs. The driving caused the death of one person and serious injury of another.
R v R
Prosecuting counsel in a case where the defendant caused very serious injury to 3 people, including one of his own passengers.
Unyime is highly experienced in defending and prosecuting individuals suspected of fraud or other financial or corporate crime and related regulatory matters, to which her meticulous case preparation and quick grasp of detail are well suited.
She is able to provide advice from the early stages of investigation and recently undertook a secondment with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) as part of Operation Fordbridge. The investigation into NatWest Bank PLC that concluded with the prosecution of Natwest for offences under the Money Laundering Regulation 2007 – the first criminal prosecution for a bank under these regulations.
R (FCA) v NATWEST
Assisting the FCA in a dual track Tier-1 investigation into systemic failings of a major global bank.
R v W
Prosecution counsel in a case in which the defendant was accused of defrauding a business of over £400,000 whilst working within the accounts department as Management Accountant (Deputy Head).
R v A & Others
Defence counsel in a sophisticated fraud in excess of £350,000. Over 2,000 BT customers were targeted as part of the fraud.
R v L, S and Others
Led junior for the ﬁrst two defendants on the indictment. The defendants were accused of large-scale fraud, value £400,000 on Ebay of luxury Estee Lauder products.
R v D
Prosecution counsel. The defendant was an alleged experienced conﬁdence fraudster and had assumed the identity of a famous business man to defraud her employers of their company and life savings. The defendant had a ﬁnancial reporting order imposed on her.
R v L, L & L
Representing the defendant in an alleged £3million Court of Protection fraud.
R v R
Prosecuting counsel in a complex yacht fraud case involving 23 counts of fraud and £500,000 of loss.
R v A
Prosecution counsel in a case involving victims within and outside the UK being defrauded by a company offering the opportunity for investments in gold. The company engaged in pressure selling.
Represented the defendant in a Trading Standards prosecution for fraud and Animal Health Act offences. The defendant was dubbed “Britain’s biggest ever puppy smuggler” by the press.
R v A 
Represented the applicant before the Criminal Court of Appeal. Successfully appealed a sentence for complex fraud. The sentence was reduced from 19 months to 41 weeks on the basis that the original sentence was manifestly excessive.
Unyime has a growing practice in professional discipline in which her personable and approachable manner, and her ability to quickly assimilate large volumes of material has proved invaluable. She has considerable expertise handling witnesses from her work in the criminal courts.
She has a strong advisory practice, often dealing with confidential matters of the utmost sensitivity.
Unyime accepts instructions on behalf of both the regulating authorities and the professional at the General Medical Council, Nursing and Midwifery Council, the Health and Care Professional, and the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants.
Unyime is a member of the Association of Regulatory and Disciplinary Lawyers.
Unyime has a practice in appearing in criminal proceedings concerning health and safety breaches as well as criminal allegations arising from conduct in the workplace. Her sound judgement and the tactical awareness are put to good effect.
Unyime has considerable experience in criminal proceedings in Crown and Appellate court and accepts instructions for companies, company officers and individuals, as well as the prosecuting entities, in regard to allegations of failings in safe practices, serious injury in the workplace and criminal allegations of professional wrongdoing.
Unyime is a member of the Health and Safety Lawyers Association.
LB Ealing v CD
Represented a furniture business allegedly in breach of Health and Safety requirements and selling goods that did not comply with fire safety standards.
LB Brent v M
Represented a private landlord in alleged breach of enforcement notice for one of his rented properties.
Environmental Agency v OR
Represented a trout farmer charged with Contravention of the condition of a Discharge Consent contrary to s. 85 (6) of the Water Resources Act 1991.